Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Research Frontiers (REFR) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: fmrick who wrote (640)	2/16/1998 10:40:00 AM
From: RMP	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 50217

I don't have my information handy; but I can remember this stock at around $1 not too many years ago. If you have owned this as long as you say, your gain should have outpaced any mutual fund you that have owned. I have no problem with your posting your concerns about the pace of development, and other issues. It is always healthy to look at both sides of an issue. Your questions have resulted in some very informative responses that has help us all. I am sure that that the rest of us on this board would rather see a product instead of a press release. However, It's my take that management has been responsible and is doing a good job in keeping us informed.

To: fmrick who wrote (640)	2/16/1998 9:51:00 PM
From: N. Dixon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 50217

<< People on this board have told me to call the company if I have questions. Well, I went through that 3 years ago. Why should I do it again? I think it is very clear that this is not the same old thing. >> We have NEVER had a licensee state that they planned to commercialize products using SPD, and display the prototypes of these products at a trade show and commit to 1998 in writing in a brochure handed out to industry people. Why haven't you faxed your concerns to Hankuk? They weren't even a licensee 3 years ago. They won't tell you the "same old thing." Unlike others on this board, Mr. Childers, I do not believe you have had a recent "conversion." I knew you didn't have an open mind to this stock when I replied to your request for verification from an outside source as to the viability of this technology. I gave you a quote from one of the most respected researchers in this field and you scoffed because he was quoted in the REFR quarterly report even though he was not on the REFR payroll. His comments were not solicited by the company and yet you dismissed him without so much as inquiry as to the pertinence of his findings. From that moment on you had "short seller" written all over you in my book. I think now you are hedging your rhetoric so that when good news happens and buying comes into the stock you can say that you saw it all along. I have noticed in the past few years that the negative posts come out when the stock is climbing or when it is ready to break a technical point and some margin selling may be generated. Now perhaps that is just a coincidence but, like you, I question these things. [By the way, I know the shorts are still active. There was a 15,000 share short block that went off at 7-3/8. There has been shorting in the 7's and 8's although it did taper off on Thursday but was very evident Friday ---especially at the close. It was as if someone didn't want the stock to close at 9 or above.] According to the last post here are your concerns: <<No, I still don't like the pace of development.>> Pace is determined by many things. I think it has been discussed at length the difficulty in bringing a new technology to market. What are your expected timelines now in light of recent developments? <<No, I still don't like every press release being about a new Licensee, rather than a product.>> As a shareholder you would prefer not to be updated as to new potential developers of product? I would disagree. The signing of licensees and the evolution of the technology to me is stupendous news. When I first looked at the stock, SPD still had some technological hurdles to clear before commercialization. (See Mr. Klausner's post on the complexity involved with SPD). That was why I could buy the stock at a very low price. It's not just the licensee money (which was minimal at first) that helped REFR but the additional resources provided by these companies that further refined SPD to where it is today. Your comments make it appear as if the technology was fully developed years ago and it's just that no one has been able to make it work commercially. Nothing could be further from the truth. We have moved from the R & D stage to the commercialization stage. We can see that licensees are "ramping up" for production. That is why the recent press release having to do with the speed it takes to dry the film was significant. This is an important consideration before production. It is also a sign that we are heading toward production. <<No, I don't like the management.>> And after your attacks on them, they are probably not too fond of you either, but that does not mean because they haven't run this company as you would have liked that they are dishonest or "getting rich" in some scam that will leave the shareholder holding the bag. In fact Joe Harary would have made more money staying with a New York law firm than he has working for REFR. It is not unusual for companies to offer stock in lieu of salary and bonus. It's done all the time in the Silicon Valley where I work. And if by "getting rich" you are talking about "insider selling" that claim is not substantiated by the figures. <<If GE had this product, we would all have our SPD glassed on today.>> Orcolite is developing the glasses. I still don't think you understand how the technology works, who the players are, and what the potential is. Your concerns on GE were addressed by Bob Saxe. You state that you are not hearing anything new from us that you didn't hear 3 years ago yet you were given new information by Mr. Smith as to the status of GE. It is evident to me that you did not understand where GE stood when you first posted your "concern" and even when you got an answer you never acknowledged it and now continue to bring up GE as an issue. So I go back to my first conclusion. You are trading or shorting the stock and you have a vested interest in it not going out of it's trading range. Therefore I am sure we will continue to hear from you after every news announcement, putting your spin on things. I only ask one thing. Please come up with something new. I have heard the same thing from you guys that I heard 3 years ago. I believe it was George Spence on Prodigy who would always bring up the "fire in the building and windows go dark" scare. I spoke to a fireman friend of mine at that time who laughed and said that the "the smoke makes it hard to see any way and if that were really a problem what would people do at night?" And just in case you guys bring out the old ski goggle scare "What if you're racing down a mountain and they go dark?!!!" I asked the company and they said that the goggles would contain fewer particles so even in the "off" state you would have vision.